Posted on 04/04/2002 6:50:19 AM PST by SLB
Dam I wish I had a choice!
But, you know, maybe someone ought to have one in case there are any downed trees on the runway. :-)
Seriously, though, I have that problem sometimes on the road I take to get to work in the morning. And my Poulan does the job.
Although, deep down, I have a hankerin' for a Husky!
All the "rules" on the books didn't stop any of the hijackers. "Rules" don't stop criminals.
When you can come up with some "rules" that work better than my being responsible for my own safety, then get back to me.
Your assumption is that only the govt can provide the necessary security deterrent. If the bad guys know that only the govt does this, then that leaves the ordinary citizen as the "easier mark". By your own argument, why shouldn't the passengers have liberty teeth (firearms) as well?
If the deterrent factor works for the govt, it works equally well for the rest of us.
Now that could cause an explosive decompression. (sarcasm)
..........in the head of the security guard who was checking my carry on!
Your assertion about those in the building not being able to protect themselves works only because no one on the airplane(s) was permitted to defend themselves with a firearm, and is therefore moot.
As for big talk, I have been in the unfortunate position twice of having to defend myself with a firearm, and I can personally attest to the deterrent power of a .357. You can spout all of the platitudes you wish, but I know better.
Protecting us from foreign hostility both actual and potential is on the governments to do list as set out by the Constitution. Airplanes are a weapon of mass destruction that can be used quite effectively against us. The question is how to do it. There's a two layer goal the security needs to be effective (which probably means the government doesn't do it directly) and maintain our liberties as much as possible.
Of course there's a real problem here, even in a perfect world I have no idea how to provide useful airport security without serious inconvenience to the traveler and impinging on their liberties. Given what I know about the response of your average person to being in victim situation, and what I know about taking down planes, I'm actually surprised that El Al has been effective for as long as it has been. Planes and people are just too weak.
Man, there's a lot to this.
1) Acting willfully blind to the threat posed very specifically by young males of ME descent is absolutely crazy.
2) Unless everyone is at an 'equal chance' of being searched, the young males of ME descent have a foolproof way of smuggling weapons on board--by threatening or blackmailing oldsters, white females, kids, whatever to smuggle the weapons on as mules. That's what I'd do if I was a bad guy and had an idea that certain folks won't be searched.
3) No 'zero tolerance'--use a little discretion, not in searching everyone, but in charging and actually punishing people for breaking the airport 'security' rules.
4) Any searches of passengers and flight crew is an absolute waste of time because of the lack of security attention paid to the ground crews handling food, baggage and maintenance. So you may as well just search young males of ME descent because the really motivated ones will get weapons on anyhow.
In general terms, why? Airport security is now and always has been a complete farce. That the govt has taken over makes it that much more so.
Since airlines are a public conveyance, operated by a private entity, and are just like trains, buses, and other forms of "public" transportation where is the hue and cry for such security measures there? Such other modes of transportation have the equal possibility for human and materiel destruction, so where are the hours long waits to board a bus?
No security system is perfect, and airplanes, even with armed passengers may still be flown into buildings. That said however, it has been reliably demonstrated that counting on someone else for your security is not a good idea. Guns, knifes and all sorts of other "weapons" are continually getting through the most heightened security that can be offered. In other words, it ain't workin.
It's time to try the one thing that has been proven, over and over again in a myriad of scenarios to work.
The armed citizen.
IMO, we'd be safer if we were all issued knives while boarding. A passenger with a knife becomes a hijack danger as a result of disarming (a bit of an overstatement discussing pocket knives) the passenger cabin.
I thought I read recently that folding knives with blades under 2 1/2" or 3 5/8" were now being allowed. Your dad might have been OK.
Nor have I. hehehe,..I might add.. But they'll take away my snowmobile engine powered 24" timber saw trimmer only when they pry it from by dead cold fingers,....hehehehe.
I can think of a number of older folks who can defend themselves quite well and are also saavy enough to pretend to be impotent until the youngster is stupid enough or not to let down his guard.
We might as well profile terrorists as "air-breathers", therefore no air will be allowed on board. ergo...We must place all passengers to sleep during flight.....BS
Needless to say, terrorists are a little brighter and more meticulous in their planning than the average gangsta.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.